I still do not see the MWC agreeing on FS, though Boise should be strong contender. TCU may offer to much in the short term and on paper for the MWC to pass up. I do agree the MWC will not go beyond 10 just yet.

MWC adding 1
TCU

WAC
N. Texas

******************************************

MWC adding 2
TCU
Houston / N. Texas / Boise

WAC (this is where it gets tricky)

if TCU and Houston jump, C-USA will be up for grabs. The at this point the WAC may try to pull teams from C-USA and go to a 14 team conference because of travel.

WAC W/14 teams

West:
Fresno St.
Hawaii
Boise
Nevada
San Jose St.
Utah St.
Idaho (I still like N. Arizona)

I believe the MWC and TCU are having some serious discussions and are trying to nail down some real differences. You won't hear about any invite until they have ironed everything out with all i's dotted and t's crossed. TCU, I think, is pressing for 12, MWC doesn't want that. I posted this in the "next move" thread, but with the recent board changes I'd probably lose it and I don't know how to get it here. So bear with me as I do it again.

I still do not see the MWC agreeing on FS, though Boise should be strong contender. TCU may offer to much in the short term and on paper for the MWC to pass up. I do agree the MWC will not go beyond 10 just yet.

MWC adding 1
TCU

WAC
N. Texas

******************************************

MWC adding 2
TCU
Houston / N. Texas / Boise

WAC (this is where it gets tricky)

if TCU and Houston jump, C-USA will be up for grabs. The at this point the WAC may try to pull teams from C-USA and go to a 14 team conference because of travel.

WAC W/14 teams

West:
Fresno St.
Hawaii
Boise
Nevada
San Jose St.
Utah St.
Idaho (I still like N. Arizona)

Gotta get back to work, will continue later. Please feel free to tear up and throw some ideas my way.

I don't see this happening. I think that of the three conferences (MWC, WAC and CUSA), the WAC is in the worst position. If TCU and Houston jump to MWC, CUSA would take LA Tech and maybe N. Texas. WAC will get the leftovers and have to invite Idaho to fill the gap. The WAC will pick up the pieces. They got New Mexico State and Utah State, which were good pickups. Now they are waiting to see who the MWC takes and then who CUSA takes, and then they'll decide. They are last on the totem pole. I think this will be the new conferences:

MWC: adds Boise State & TCU
CUSA: adds LaTech
WAC: adds Idaho

That's it. The Sun Belt would have to ask the new Florida schools to come up. I really see the WAC losing LaTech and becoming, GASP, a WESTERN conference...

#1, MWC isn't going to move until at least December anyway. Well, at least Craig Thompson was adamant about that. Just make sure conference presidents stay away from airport encounters until then.

#2, TCU has to make a decision. As I hear it, they aren't of one mind on this. You probably have old guard donors who don't understand a lick of why the school might want to make such a move, and newer money that doesn't get why they don't. Both sides have their points. Any old guard should be assumed to have more money on hand. Only blindness seems to prevent schools from learning lessons from this year, however.

#3, Anyone who thinks the MWC hasn't already talked to the BCS about what it takes to be a direct beneficiary is, well, naive. Given that, forget 12 or more teams until Boise and Reno double in size and Fresno stays clean for 10 consecutive years.

#3, Anyone who thinks the MWC hasn't already talked to the BCS about what it takes to be a direct beneficiary is, well, naive. Given that, forget 12 or more teams until Boise and Reno double in size and Fresno stays clean for 10 consecutive years.

Pounder, I don't completely understand this part off your reasoning. Your #1 and #2 are right on. :D Is it your opinion that the MWC would look stronger to the BCS folks as a single round robin conference as opposed to a divisional coference w/ a chamionship game? ??? I would disagree with that...let me know

I believe the MWC and TCU are having some serious discussions and are trying to nail down some real differences. You won't hear about any invite until they have ironed everything out with all i's dotted and t's crossed. TCU, I think, is pressing for 12, MWC doesn't want that. I posted this in the "next move" thread, but with the recent board changes I'd probably lose it and I don't know how to get it here. So bear with me as I do it again.

MWC - West Division
BYU
Utah
Boise State
Fresno State
San Diego State
Hawai'i

TCU gets reasonable travel, a fairly easy ride to the championship, and a nice trip to Hawai'i once in a while (not every other year), plus VERY strong BCS consideration.
:-/

I agree with you Gumby. That is a BCS conference, and it makes the most sense and it kills the WAC and C-USA. It would be the best move by the MWC, and it would be a better conference than the Big East which is so overrated it isnt even funny.

I'm willing to bet that if the meetings with the BCS happens and they say jump, the MWC will say how high? I would say that if the BCS offers a deal that if they go to 12, they will get the bid over the Big East, the MWC will add 4 right away. I wonder if the conversation will be on simple access, or what do we need to add for access. You could argue that the current MWC would be better top-bottom than the new Big East. But isn't the BCS all about the TV markets? Would MWC be more appealing than an east-coast conference? I think another argument could be made that most of the conferences that are in the BCS (SEC, Big 12, Big 10, Big East, ACC) are mostly east of the Mississippi. I think that it would be nice to give more access to a western conference (MWC).

I hope that the WAC and CUSA aren't killed too much by MWC expansion. I still think that LaTech would leave in a heartbeat to CUSA. Idaho probably has the acceptance letter printed up and waiting for the first call. North Texas would be another good candidate for either the MWC or CUSA, given that it's right in the middle of both conferences. I also think that the SunBelt will actually be ok through all of this. I just hope that both the SB and WAC become more regional (ie LaTech shouldn't be in the WAC and Idaho shouldn't be in the Sun Belt).

I would also like to comment on SDSU and UNLV. These schools are not happy with the Gang of 5 and may very well jump to the WAC, if the MWC does not pull in the teams that they want.

SDSU wants FS
UNLV wants NV

Either team could care less if TCU comes aboard or not, they are just tired of being the little ugly step children in the whole scheme of things. The WAC could end up looking like...

VDog, interesting thought. One that I have a hard time disareeing with. TCU brings some of the DFW TV market (not all or even most) and Boise would make another good "yes man" for your "Gang of 5". The 5 (now 6) get more exposure, but still bring a majority to any vote. UNLV, SDSU, UNM definitely feel unloved in this arrangement. Sooo...

If Nevada is shut out even after the substantial lobbying being done by UNLV, they may feel like moving "down to the WAC" to feel more empowered and join thier statesmen.

I don't see the same effort being put forth by SDSU for Fresno, but just for fun, lets say they bolt too.

The Lobos have no love lost for the Aggies and they do reside in the intermountain region. I don't see them moving. I see it looking maybe like this...

I think it's silly to assume that MWC and representative officials haven't already been in contact with various BCS officials. Remember how much ABC is a player. This isn't about the quality of the conference schools, it's about putting schools out before the public that get good TV ratings. The MWC, minus BYU (and maybe Colorado State if they maintain a good stretch) does not have that with 8, nor 9, nor 12. Fresno is an ESPN draw (not as good of one as you might think, BTW), NOT a network draw. If you don't like the rules, perform a coup of the NCAA AND Congress (anti-trust) and get this done (I wouldn't mind, conditionally).

The MWC has also talked to ESPN in all likelihood, asking what 9, or 10, or 12 schools might reduce the cut in the next TV contract. Since you hear leaks about TCU being 9 and maybe Boise being 10, you probably won't see any more than that. I've also already demonstrated that going to 12, even with $1 million extra per year for a conference championship game (per the Salt Lake Trib, that's all the MWC would get), the current schools would receive less TV contract funds than they get now. They probably won't even make money on TCU alone (which is a stab at TV market potential), but you have to have a hedge in place if Wyoming fails to meet the new standards.

Please remember the other principle- the MWC gets money from ESPN (who does think they've overpaid) to air games on the network, while the WAC gets scraps for a handful of Fridays; that's created more controversy than interest. I can't see anyone passing up the money just because they're a little upset with the power brokers.

OK, I'm getting frustrated... but it's a simple principle. I'm getting good at this because of adhering to the principle of "follow the money" rather than think about the level of play.

One thing to the Fresno fans... you might pick up on MWC schools who've had past difficulties, I can understand that, but calling MWC presidents hypocrites doesn't gain you admission to the conference. It is what it is.

It would be beneficial to the MWC to wait and see just how TCU finishes their year. Their schedule is ranked 116 on the NCAA.com web site. They just played their first defense ranked over 60, and how many games have they won by 3 points?
A road game at Southern Miss will be totally winnable for them but it will also be a test. They were in a similar situation in 2000, before losing a bowl game to the same school.
One more major point is that this is a private school with a very small enrollment. It isn't quite the diamond in the rough that it is being touted as. The way they help a conference would be this year. Next year could be totally different. Their own study says they lose $200,000 a year moving to another conference. That is just in football.
To move to a conference without a marquee power. Granted, the MWC has about 5 teams usually in the top 50 - 60. Well, the new C USA does as well. They also have the shorter travel. C USA with TCU and a championship game is just as viable as a BCS conference as the new big east or the new MWC.

Just food for thought.

Quote:

I think it's silly to assume that MWC and representative officials haven't already been in contact with various BCS officials. Remember how much ABC is a player. This isn't about the quality of the conference schools, it's about putting schools out before the public that get good TV ratings. The MWC, minus BYU (and maybe Colorado State if they maintain a good stretch) does not have that with 8, nor 9, nor 12. Fresno is an ESPN draw (not as good of one as you might think, BTW), NOT a network draw. If you don't like the rules, perform a coup of the NCAA AND Congress (anti-trust) and get this done (I wouldn't mind, conditionally).

The MWC has also talked to ESPN in all likelihood, asking what 9, or 10, or 12 schools might reduce the cut in the next TV contract. Since you hear leaks about TCU being 9 and maybe Boise being 10, you probably won't see any more than that. I've also already demonstrated that going to 12, even with $1 million extra per year for a conference championship game (per the Salt Lake Trib, that's all the MWC would get), the current schools would receive less TV contract funds than they get now. They probably won't even make money on TCU alone (which is a stab at TV market potential), but you have to have a hedge in place if Wyoming fails to meet the new standards.

Please remember the other principle- the MWC gets money from ESPN (who does think they've overpaid) to air games on the network, while the WAC gets scraps for a handful of Fridays; that's created more controversy than interest. I can't see anyone passing up the money just because they're a little upset with the power brokers.

OK, I'm getting frustrated... but it's a simple principle. I'm getting good at this because of adhering to the principle of "follow the money" rather than think about the level of play.

One thing to the Fresno fans... you might pick up on MWC schools who've had past difficulties, I can understand that, but calling MWC presidents hypocrites doesn't gain you admission to the conference. It is what it is.

It would be beneficial to the MWC to wait and see just how TCU finishes their year. Their schedule is ranked 116 on the NCAA.com web site. They just played their first defense ranked over 60, and how many games have they won by 3 points?
A road game at Southern Miss will be totally winnable for them but it will also be a test. They were in a similar situation in 2000, before losing a bowl game to the same school.
One more major point is that this is a private school with a very small enrollment. It isn't quite the diamond in the rough that it is being touted as. The way they help a conference would be this year. Next year could be totally different. Their own study says they lose $200,000 a year moving to another conference. That is just in football.
To move to a conference without a marquee power. Granted, the MWC has about 5 teams usually in the top 50 - 60. Well, the new C USA does as well. They also have the shorter travel. C USA with TCU and a championship game is just as viable as a BCS conference as the new big east or the new MWC.

Just food for thought.

What! C-USA has Marshall, Southern Miss and TCU thats it football wise. MWC would have BYU, Colorado State, Boise State, Air Force, Utah, Fresno State, Hawaii if they went to 12. Thats a lot stronger football conference.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum